Royal Canal Greenway

beauf wrote: »

It took the foot traffic that there is Boombridge with the new Luas terminus, to make a significant difference to that area.

Ye are dragging this well off topic. Just build a wall/fence to keep the locals out. Access at either end at the train stations. End of issue.

Neither Broombridge nor the North Strand are in Fingal.



https://consult.fingal.ie/en/consultation/draft-fingal-development-plan-2017-%E2%80%93-2023-stage-2/chapter/chapter-12-development


"Green corridors are linear open spaces along paths, water courses, planting or other natural features that provide opportunities for walking and cycling, informal recreation, and biodiversity and wildlife migration. They will not generally be included as part of the quantitative calculation for open space provision, except with the agreement of the Planning Authority. Green corridors should be incorporated into all new large developments, as part of Green Infrastructure provision, linking large areas of open space and linking with areas outside the development site."


Walled-off greenways are against the County Development Plan. Dotted through the plan are other proposals (see below for an example) that encourage open access.

"Open Plan Estates
It is important to maintain the openness of residential development, particularly schemes where openness is a defining feature of the development. This can be achieved through the removal of the exempted development rights with regard to the provision of boundary walls, railing or other features to the front of houses.

1
Gated Communities
Gated communities are communities or developments in which access to the public is not readily available due to the erection of different types of physical barriers. Gated communities serve to exclude and divide communities and do not support the development of a permeable, connected and linked urban area.

1
Objective DMS32

Prohibit proposals that would create a gated community for any new residential developments."

ilsilenzio wrote: »

Mercian Pro. "A few thoughts having walked......."

Mercian pro has written very reasonable and impressive piece, apparently as a resident from without the area, not that I would in any way deny him his absolute right to comment or advocate because of this. However his interest appears to be influenced to a great degree by the fact that he appears to be a keen cyclist. If I were a keen cyclist I would no doubt also have similar views were it not for a fact that I have resided in one of the cul de sacs for about 40 years. I would suggest that I would be expected to have a slightly different view, opinion and most importantly, expect more influence in something which very directly, adversely affects me, my family and local residents.

Thank you for your kind words. Yes, I confess to being a keen cyclist and to living further along the Canal in Glasnevin. I also admit to being a member of the Royal Canal Amenity Group and to regularly walking my dog on various sections of the canal towpath. This morning we had a most enjoyable stroll from Cross Guns Bridge to Ashtown and back that included lots of "lovely morning" exchanges, a chat with a lovely couple who travel from Dunboyne regularly to walk the canal, a couple of (canine) swims and a rare sighting of an otter (definately not a coypu!) The Royal is my quickist link to the joys of the countryside and I would love to see more people enjoy it on the water and on the slowly developing Greenway.


I find it ironic that an early case of IMBYism by the Duke of Leinster has led us to the contentious situation we are now in. By insisting that the Canal serve his Carton Estate, he forced the alteration of the route through what became the Deep Sinking. Not only did this bankrupt the first Royal Canal Company, it also resulted in the deaths of numerous tow horses and 16 passengers on the Longford in 1845. Had the original planned route not been changed, there would have been a wide and level towpath beside it, easily upgraded to Greenway standards.


Getting back to your comments above, I am interested in your view that you should have more influence on the planning process as one potentially affected by the Greenway than I should as a future user. In practice, from reading the comments of your local Councillors, would-be Councillors and TDs, you have immense influence. Why would they listen to me as my vote is not only in a different area but in a different Council? My own Councillors, while interested in the Dublin sections of the Greenway, have no interest in matters further upstream in Fingal.



As I'm sure you're aware by now, the Royal Canal Greenway when completed will be the longest Greenway in the country at 145km from the Liffey to the Shannon. It will form the major part of the Dublin to Galway Cycle route and, as such, will be the western end of the Moscow to Galway EuroVelo 2 Route. Of more importance from a sustainability perspective, it will facilitate cycle commuting to and from Maynooth, Leixlip and Dublin. Many of those who will make use of the Greenway in the future, walkers, strollers, cyclists, wheelchair users, commuters, tourists, et al, won't even be aware of the current consultation process. I think they should have a say too and I, and a few others, are trying to anticipate and present their views.


The Deep Sinking from Granard Bridge to Kennan Bridge is 2.4km. From Delwood Grove to Brompton Court is approx 500m and the south side of Delwood Park is about 200m long. For the great majority of the proposed route the northside option is far simpler to construct and will involve a lot less damage to the canal side environment. For the difficult section behind Delwood Park, technical solutions can and will be found. I look forward to cycling and walking the Greenway in 2020.

beauf wrote: »

Literally none of that is relevant to the subject at hand.

You are dragging entirely unrelated issues that no one has proposed into the thread and then arguing against them.
Also you are using terms interchangeably when they are not interchangeable, simply so you can argue against them.

Why not stick to the issues at hand, rather than inventing ones that don't exist here.

Not at all. The concept of open access is embedded in the county development plan, and that means the cul-de-sacs should be opened, greenway or not.

buffalo wrote: »

I can see why they don't connect if there's that much opposition to opening up cul-de-sacs or building cycle tracks close to houses. Are you blaming the state or the local residents for the issues in D15?

Exactly. Fingal have produced a number of very good proposals for opening up walking access and have consolidated them into the Development Plan as well. These are needed in order to promote healthy walking and as measures to address climate change.

The problem is that every change is fought tooth and nail by local NIMBYism, mostly provoked by scaremongering around anti-social behaviour. Look at the gated communities, look at the high walls on the Snugborough Road or the Ongar Road etc. etc. All are regressive, but insisted on by local pressure.

daymobrew wrote: »

One thing that keeps being ignored is that the cul de sac access points were all labelled "potential".

People in the area are convinced that further access points are planned into Delwood in addition to those indicated on the map.

I had understood from conversations that the existing actual cul de sacs were proposed being opened, based on the map it is only proposing opening into the existing green that already give pedestrian access to a few cul de sacs...

Unless I'm missing something?

beauf wrote: »

Its not about being pro or anti cycling. its about only seeing a narrow view of the issues. Also playing the NIMBYism card constantly.

One issue for example is people parking in estates instead of paying for parking at the train station. There are solutions. But its being ignored as NIMBYism here.

Complaining about parking in an estate is not valid once the roads are handed over to the council. Residents don’t own the space outside their house unless it’s in their own driveway. Where I live is a private road and we have that issue but life is too short.